the chamber will work on debate rules for a package for the federal government beyond september 30. and a resolution to honor activist charlie kirk shot and killed last week in utah. when lawmakers return be sure to follow our live coverage of the house here on c-span. >> our live capitol hill coverage as we take you to testimony now from f.b.i. director kash patel. he's appearing before the house judiciary committee today. we join this live in progress here on c-span. >> we are working through our intelligence community partners to identify those individuals and taken down numerous individuals and numerous rings across this country to neutralize that terrorist threat, including places like new york city, los angeles, and i believe dallas, texas. >> how extensively did criminal cartels like sinaloa, ms-13, and

others infiltrate our country during the biden administration. le mr. patel: tens of thousands. .a i can't remember the numbers of tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of individuals they found that came in illegally and associations to criminal networks have been deported. >> that effort is being opposed every step of the way by democratic leaders in our cities, states, and right here in the congress, isn't that true? director patel: we are working where we can in every single city and i welcome the opportunity to partner with republicans and democrats fighting violent briem. mr. mcclintock: mr. biggs asked about arctic frost. what can you tell bus that and what we need to do? director patel: let me provide you with more documentation on arctic frost and calling witness from the paperwork we have given you. you have that right anti-american public deserves to hear what those people have to say.

as for my ongoing investigation there's not much i can say. mr. mcclintock: what role did the f.b.i. have in covering up the hunter biden laptop story? dir. patel: i believe the f.b.i. was in possession of verified information from that laptop and it was improperly publicized that they did not have information and masked it as russian disinformation. we now know that was categorically false. i don't know why the f.b.i. did that when we did that but we've released all the materials related to that. mr. mcclintock: thank you. mr. jordan: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. goldman: does donald trump appear anywhere in the epstein files? dir. patel: i'm sorry, could you say that again? goamed it's not a compli -- mr. goldman: it's not a complicated question. does donald trump appear anywhere in the epstein files? dir. patel: i didn't say that was a complicated question, i didn't hear you. we've released where president trump's name is in the epstein

files and everybody else and all credible information that we are legally allowed to release has been released. mr. goldman: let's go through that. you're referring to court orders that prohibit you from releasing grand jury testimony under rule 6-e. is that what you're referring to when you say as the law allows? dir. patel: that's a piece of it. mr. goldman: really? what other evidence does the -- do those three court orders you cited prohibit from being releaseed? dir. patel: information that was collected pursuant to those search warrants that were limited -- mr. goldman: wrong. wrong. that's not what the court order says and that's not under 6-e. dir. patel: i said that's 6-e. i said there was others and i'm answering that there are sealed court order documents. mr. goldman: they are unsealed as part of discovery given to ghislaine maxwell. they are no longer sealed. dir. patel: that's just not true. we can argue about it all you want. mr. goldman: you agree that there are -- so your testimony here is that the reason why you

are not releasing all of the videos that you have acknowledged there are so many and that the f.b.i. spent thousands of hours of reviewing, the photographs, all of the -- and the photographs that you have, you're saying that -- you're not releasing those because there's a court order requiring them to be sealed? is that your testimony? dir. patel: i never said that about the videos. on the totality of the videos, of the thousands of images that were seized pursuant to the search warrants executed at the time, the overwhelming majority of that video is important graphic material that was -- pornographic material that was downloaded from the internet and child pornography. we will never release that. mr. goldman: if there are videos that relate to others who epstein trafficked to, such as maybe prince andrew or photographs, that you have total control to release. dir. patel: yes and if it exists

-- mr. goldman: why haven't you released it? dir. patel: why were you supposing that is a fact when in fact it is false? are you saying that -- mr. goldman: you're saying none of the videos relate to anything relevant to the jeffrey epstein trafficking ring? dir. patel: every single video that we have collected pursuant to the prior search warrants have been examined for the last 10 years and every single video has been utilized for whatever prosecutions were able to be legally brought. mr. goldman: i'm not asking about prosecutions. i'm asking why you aren't releasing the full epstein files including the names of people who were involved in the sex ring that you promised to do before you became f.b.i. director. dir. patel: i just told you, i'm not going to release downloaded pornography of children on the internet. mr. goldman: i'm not asking about that. i'm asking about all the other files. dir. patel: what other videos? tell me. mr. goldman: you're saying there are no videos relevant to anyone else involved in the jeffrey epstein sex ring?

dir. patel: pursuant to the search warrants, that's all we have in our possession. that's all we got. mr. goldman: i'm asking you, in that stuff, there's nothing that's related to any other people engaged with epstein in undersane sex? dir. patel: that's correct, to my knowledge, no. mr. goldman: let's talk about the witness interviews. those are not subject to the court order. those are not subject to any fictional sealed order for a search warrant. why aren't you releasing those with the redacted names of the victims? dir. patel: we are releasing as much as legally allowed. that's why we went back -- mr. goldman: how is that not legally allowed? dir. patel: do you know how court orders work? do you know how protective orders work? mr. goldman: i was a real prosecutor for 10 years. i know exactly how -- dir. patel: so i was a fake one? mr. goldman: i want to understand what the court order prevents you from releasing witness statements that the f.b.i. took. dir. patel: you should know that as a real prosecutor, when the

court hands down a protective order and a motion to seal, the material is sealed unless that -- mr. goldman: your testimony here is that all of those witness statements are under a court order, a protective order? dir. patel: we are providing everything we can legally provide conscious. mr. goldman: that's not my question. my question is, why are those witness statements that are not grand jury testimony, that if they were under a protective order are no longer under a protective order, why are they not being releaseed? dir. patel: how are they not under protective order? mr. goldman: why are you not going to the court like you did for the grand jury testimony to unseal those records? dir. patel: the d.o.j. did go to the court. mr. goldman: not on those records. you just went on grand jury. >> the time of the gentleman is expired. the time of the gentleman is expired. mr. goldman: you're hiding the epstein files. you're part of the cover-up. dir. patel: can i respond? mr. jordan: sure can. dir. patel: any allegations that i'm part of a cover-up to protect child sexual trafficking

and victims of human trafficking and sexual crimes is patently and categorically false. and the work of my -- mr. goldman: i hope you'll talk to them when they have requested to speak with you. because the victims have requested and you are not responding to them. mr. jordan: directer, yes or no, is the f.b.i. still spying on parents at school board meetings? dir. patel: no, sir. mr. jordan: are they still targeting catholics? are they still spying on president trump? dir. patel: i don't believe so. mr. jordan: is the f.b.i. still censoring americans? dir. patel: no, sir. mr. jordan: is the f.b.i. still targeting americans for shopping at cabellas or purchasing bibles? dir. patel: nobody's targeted for their faith. mr. jordan: is the f.b.i. still targeting americans who are pro-life? is the f.b.i. still cooking the books on crime data? dir. patel: the crime data is real. mr. jordan: is the f.b.i. still purging agents for conservative viewpoints? dir. patel: no one at the f.b.i. is asked their viewpoints on politics.

mr. jordan: is the f.b.i. still labeling the betsy ross flag, the american revolution, a hate symbol? dir. patel: no. mr. jordan: maybe that's why you've been able to -- what was the number? 23,000 bad guys you've arrested, a huge increase from the same time period in the previous administration, i think you said 1400 predators, had 4,000 children rescued, were those the facts? dir. patel: 4700, 35% increase on children rescue. mr. jordan: yeah. and you got the guy that, abbey gate. mr. jordan: maybe when you're not focused on politics, you can actually do what the f.b.i.'s supposed to do. go get the bad guys. right? dir. patel: that's when the men and women of the f.b.i. do. mr. jordan: director, did john britain lie to congress? let me just read a couple things actually before you answer that. two years ago we had mr. brennan in for an interview and i asked him, how did you learn about the dossier in december of 2026, mrd

a copy of it from the f.b.i. and the c.i.a. was very much opposed to having any reference or inclusion of the dossier in the intelligence community assessment. that's what john brennan told united states congress. seven weeks ago the director of national intelligence told us this. john brennan lied. and denied using the dossier in the intelligence community assessment because he knew it was discredited. c.i.a. officer told the house intelligence committee, brennan refused to remove it and whether confronted with the dossier's main flaws, he responded, yes, but doesn't it ring true? john brennan lied to us? dir. patel: marriage, i won't stylize the evidence. what i will say is that the intelligence community assessment, those that created it, and any individual involved with it, is an ongoing investigation. mr. jordan: there's an investigation into what took place in december and january of

december 2016, january, 2017 when this whole thing started, this grand conspiracy. that is being investigated, is that right? dir. patel: that's been publicly announced by the department. mr. jordan: that's been announced by the department. did chris ray hide documents from this committee? dir. patel: you would know better than me, sir. mr. jordan: i think you told us like 700 pieces of information you've given this committee since you've been director relative to just one incident, the catholic memorandum from the richmond field office. dir. patel: i can give you the comparison. the catholic memo, i believe we turned over 750 documents. in mr. ray's tenure, i believe they turned over 19 pages. mr. jordan: 19 pages to 700. why would chris wray hide information from this committee? hazard a guess why he would do that? dir. patel: i don't know, sir. mr. jordan: think maybe it was because the f.b.i. was spying on a priest, trying to the him to break the priest-pen contaminant confidence that exists? do you think maybe that was the reason? dir. patel: you'd have to ask him, sir. mr. jordan: yead, we'd love to

do that. artie k.'s tropic vortex ride -- what are these code names about, director? do you know? dir. patel: not off the top of my head. mr. jordan: artie k, my understanding is these are code names for leaked investigations of classified information from the year 2017. does that ring a bell? dan: in terms of leak -- dir. patel: in terms of leak investigations, many of those are classified and ongoing. we are working with you to produce documents as we close those investigations or as we declassify them. mr. jordan: let me ask you this question because this is something i've wondered about, the way the f.b.i. used to work. seems to me you had all these people in government leaking information that then gets reported in the press, there's a story written about it and then that article is then used to further the investigation and move forward with what they want to do. did that take place back in 2016

and 2017? dir. patel: that's the exact scenario that took place in the fisa application for carter page and the rest of the trump campaign. mr. jordan: that's frightening because that's what the c.i.a. is supposed to do in foreign countries. it's not supposed to happen to americans. but it did. didn't it? dir. patel: yes. mr. jordan: not just any americans, it happened with the president of the united states. er is that accurate? dir. patel: yes, sir. mr. jordan: and you were the key guy in helping expose that. i think our country will be forever grateful for what you did to let the country know that was going on, involving americans, which is not supposed to happen and not just against any american but the president of the united states. the their now recognizes -- the chair now recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. lofgren: thank you, mr. chairman. i'm concerned by reports that f.b.i. agents have been diverted from their important work on crime and anti-terrorism to work on matters that are not critical to our safety. i'd like to play the video, a

whole video. >> jeffrey epstein's black book. but who? i mean, there's -- dir. patel: that's under direct control of the director of the f.b.i.. >> the black book, it's not just sitting -- i mean, that's hoover power times 10. dir. patel: and to me that's a thing i think president trump should run on. on day one. roll out the black book. ms. lofgren: in contrast to that attitude of let it all out, we're getting reports of actions that run contrary to getting everything out and that also involved diversions of f.b.i. resources. for example, an f.b.i. whistleblower reported that you were pressured by the attorney general to place 1,000 personnel on 24-hour shifts to mine roughly 100,000 epstein-related

records to redact president trump names from the files. bloomberg reported this, that you directed f.b.i. special agents from the new york and washington field offices to join the bureau's foia employees in winchester and another building a few miles away and that while reviewing the epstein files, f.b.i. personnel identified numerous references to trump in the documents and people familiar with the matter said that trump's name along with other high-profile individuals was blacked out. "the new york times" reports, and this is a quote, justice department officials diverted hundreds of f.b.i. employees and federal prosecutors from their regular duties to go through the documents at least four times, including once to flag any references to mr. trump and other prominent figures. details of the review were based on accounts by three former f.b.i. and justice department

officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because of fears of retaliation. and further that the f.b.i. finished -- after they finished its review of the files and materials were sent to a team of justice department lawyers who double checked the f.b.i.'s redactions and, quote, were instructed to flag any mentions of mr. trump and other celebrities. now, i have three questions for you, mr. patel. about this. first, how many times did president trump's name appear in the epstein files? it was more than 100? more than 1,000? were the agents who were pulled from their duties to redact the president's name from the epstein files working on criminal cases or national security cases or child sex trafficking cases? and are the number of agents that have been reported diverted for these purposes, is that accurate? dir. patel: no. ms. lofgren: no what? dir. patel: you asked if it was accurate.

i said it wasn't. ms. lofgren: you're saying that none of this happened, that -- dir. patel: no, i'm saying it was inaccurate. ms. lofgren: how many times did president trump's name appear in the epstein files? more than 100? more than 1,000? dir. patel: no. and what we've been able to release is what we've been legally able to release and that -- ms. lofgren: that's not the question. i asked you, how many times did the president's name appear? dir. patel: i don't know. ms. lofgren: it's your testimony you do not know that answer? dir. patel: the number of times, no. ms. lofgren: could you tell us how many agents were diverted for this task? and what they were working on? dir. patel: when you say diverted, you make it seem as if agents were pulled off what they do all the time. agents at the f.b.i. masterfully do double duty and triple duty. because of the public's interest in this case, we flexed resources to make sure that we could answer the public's signal demand. do you want us to look through the material provided to you or do you not want us to do that? ms. lofgren: it's your testimony that no one was diverted from a criminal matter that this was a

top priority to go through these -- this material, to look for mr. trump's name? is that your testimony? that's the highest priority of the f.b.i.? dir. patel: what's one of the most impressive things about the f.b.i., make sure the mission needs are not hurt and that's what happened here. ms. lofgren: it's shocking to me that the f.b.i. would think that erasing mr. trump's name from the epstein files is a high priority when we have crime, we have national security threats, we have terrorism threats, we have murders such as that occur unfortunately with mr. kirk. it's shocking to hear that that's your highest priority and with that, mr. chairman, i yield back. dir. patel: that's literally not what i said. mr. jordan: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. >> director, is president trump implicated in any wrongdoing

related to jeffrey epstein? dir. patel: based on the entirety of the evidence that we have, absolutely not. >> the president is not implicated? dir. patel: correct. >> thank you. i want to talk a little bit about china's malign influence here in america. mr. tiffany: and we've seen spy balloons traverse the united states, we've seen police stations in communities around america. and sitting in the chair you're in just two years ago, there was a sheriff from arizona that was here who said that the exponential increase in the amount of fentanyl that is coming into america is directly related to the open borders policies of the previous administration. do you agree with the sheriff's characterization? dir. patel: in large part, yes. mr. tiffany: so since you've been director, has there been a reduction with, i mean, we've talked about how the border's largely secure now, right?

dir. patel: the southern border, yes, sir. mr. tiffany: the southern border is largely secure. has there been a reduction or a reduction in the amount of fentanyl that's coming into america? dir. patel: there's been a massive reduction to the tune of -- we've seized more than 25% year to date this year than the prior year and that's enough fentanyl to kill 120 million americans. mr. tiffany: does china play a role in this fentanyl that's coming to america? dir. patel: as i stated in my opening, sir, what they do and the companies in china, mainland china do, is produce the precursors and the cutting agents that they ship overseas through various countries and to the mexican drug cartels who produce it. so they basically are the cooks in terms of the ingredients. mr. tiffany: what is the f.b.i. doing to stop china from delivering death to america? dir. patel: for the first time in a decade, i actually reached out to my counterpart at the ministry of public security, no one at the f.b.i. had done so. to engage -- mr. tiffany: ministry of security, where's that? dir. patel: in mainland dhien. to engage in a conversation to

say, hey, can we have a certain number of these precursor chemicals listed in china so that they become illegal and illegal to trade. we're also working with our counterparts in places like india and guatemala because the shipment routes of the precursors, the mexican drug cartels have become creative and instead of directly coming to america they're going into these countries and we've had massive success in india and guatemala and those governments' great partnerships to shut down the ability to ship the precursors into those countries. mr. tiffany: those people working with security agencies have been working with you, is that accurate? dir. patel: yes, sir. mr. tiffany: so i want to turn to a couple cases that are at the university of michigan where chinese nationals on behalf of the chinese government smuggled in illicit biological materials. stuff that can harm our agricultural industry. what actions are you taking as we see repeated stories of chinese nationals doing this in

the united states? dir. patel: so just that, sir. in this calendar year alone, our counterintelligence operations in cases brought against the chinese are up by i think something like 40%. specifically the cases in michigan show two threat streams. not just against our agricultural industry, which is a threat to national security, but they were also bringing in chemical agents and mushrooms, i'm not the exact expert, that would have hurt our population. we arrested and charged all of those individuals and we're aggressively going after them in every single state. because they weren't doing it in michigan alone. mr. tiffany: should research universities across the united states be doing a thorough job of vetting chinese nationals that are coming to their universitys? dir. patel: they should. mr. tiffany: turning to spying in america. we heard the stories about diane fine -- senator dianne feinstein's driver who was a chinese spy. we're familiar with linda sun who worked in governor hochul's office.

christine fang in california. are you -- what are you doing to find these people who are chinese spies that are trying to burrow themselves into the politics of america? because we know it's happening. right? dir. patel: yes, it is. and what our counterintelligence unit is doing is aggressively seeking the intelligence into where these individuals are working, then we are utilizing our operational authorities to go in and investigate them either through our human source networks and collecting information through lawful process online, search warrant, and data, so that we can bring proper arrest charges and publicize to the world what they're doing here. and just because we've caught a few doesn't mean we've caught everybody. we've got a lot more to go. mr. tiffany: one more quick question. the f.b.i. arrested a judge in wisconsin for interfering with a federal law enforcement operation. could you tell us a little bit about that?

and is a judge above the law here in america? dir. patel: no one is and that case is ongoing but as you stated in these allegations that there was an interference in a federal law enforcement priority that was interfered with. mr. tiffany: i yield back. mr. jordan: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from tennessee is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chair. director patel, i believe you had primary importance in starting operation vieper in memphis, is that correct? dir. patel: yes, sir. mr. cohen: operation viper brought in the f.b.i., d.e.a., a.t.f., to help memphis police in policing the city? dir. patel: that will be phase two, sir. phase one was f.b.i. and local law enforcement in memphis for the last few months. mr. cohen: ok. you did a good job, at least director and mayor told me that that's been helpful. the f.b.i. working with the police. the f.b.i. are trained in law enforcement, they know miranda rights and how to do policing

and they do a good job working with the police. do you think that the national guard is necessary to do the work that the f.b.i.'s doing now? dir. patel: thank you. i do think it's necessary to finish it. what we've done is 500 arrests in memphis and 110 federal indictments. but what we need to do is we've only secured a piece of where the criminal conduct is occurring in pep if is and we can't -- memphis and we can't work inside perimeters that are not established and safe and we don't have the man power to give us the space to fully go into the areas where the criminal activity remains. mr. cohen: are you suggesting that the national guard is going to go into the war crime, heavily crimed areas? dir. patel: they're going to establish like they did in washington, d.c., perimeters where local law enforcement and the f.b.i., d.e.a., a.t.f. and u.s. marshalls can go into. we can't be being into all these areas knowing that they're extremely volatile and jeopardizing the safety of our agents. mr. cohen: will the national guard do anything in washington to help the f.b.i. stay safe

from these dangerous elements? dir. patel: they established perimeters. mr. cohen: established perimeters. and the criminals knew about it. dir. patel: it was a visible force, sir. so they kind of saw it. mr. cohen: i commend you for what you did and i think the f.b.i. coming in, we have a crime problem in memphis. the f.b.i. has helped. d.e.a. will help and the a.t.f. will help. i don't think the national guard's going to help and what i've seen, they're not trained in law enforcement are they? dir. patel: no, sir. mr. cohen: so that could be a problem. who will direct the national guard in memphis? will it be -- will they have control over your agents? dir. patel: no, sir, they won't. mr. cohen: who will have control over your agents? you? dir. patel: the s.e.c. and the chain of command up to washington, d.c., will control the f.b.i. but there's a task force that was put together that is going to be led by an interagency, the heads of u.s. marshals, d.e.a. and f.b.i. will be working together with d.h.s. collectively on this. mr. cohen: you have visited memphis before? dir. patel: yes, sir, i have. mr. cohen: you know how good a city it is. dir. patel: i love memphis. mr. cohen: a lot of us do.

and memphis is a great city. great history. civil rights museum. might say something about slavery. but that was the history. needs to be taught. beal street. barbeque. and people should come. it's not a troubled city. we've got some crime. but it's not a troubled city. we're not troubled. we love our city and we hope that the national guard doesn't come in and cause people who have questions about memphis because it's a city they should visit. let me ask you this, you said the homicide rates are coming down to an all-time low. when does modern recorded history start? dir. patel: i think the f.b.i. and i'll get back to you on this, has stats going back to 30 years. mr. cohen: i was thinking back to ozzie and hair yet and i didn't think you could beat that. secondly, you mentioned the epstein case. did any of the women that were victims, they came up here and had a press conference and all, did any of them contact your office and ask to give

information? dir. patel: to my knowledge, no, sir. mr. cohen: if they did, let me ask you first, is there a statute of limitations on sex crimes like that? sex with a minor, rape? dir. patel: the don's the expert but -- d.o.j.'s the expert but i don't believe there's limitation on that. mr. cohen: should you not be interviews those people who know who raped them and the names and the places and give you that information? that seems like that's a treasure trove of information and it's a serious, serious, serious number of crimes. dir. patel: sir, i couldn't agree with you more. we've been very public about asking individuals to come forward with new information and we would run out every single lead on that. mr. cohen: i'm sure the women will come forward, especially today, to ensure they get an opportunity. because that seems like something we ought to do. mr. driscoll, what was his reputation? dir. patel: i can't comment on his matter. it's an ongoing litigation. cron cone but his rep -- mr. cohen: but his reputation you can tell us about. dir. patel: i can't tell you about his reputation.

his work has been laid out in that lawsuit. mr. cohen: how many of the f.b.i. agents who worked on the january 6 case have been fired? dir. patel: i don't very that number, sir. mr. cohen: ballpark figure? dir. patel: no, but i can tell you that individuals based on case assignments in the f.b.i. that i have led have not been terminated for case assignments. mr. cohen: thank you, sir. come back to memphis and work with kevin kean and our tourism bureau. dir. patel: yeah, he's great. mr. cohen: thank you for your work in memphis. mr. jordan: the gentleman is recognized. >> i've got four documents i'd like to introduce into the record. the first one is jeffrey epstein's sex story played out for years in plain sight and acosta's quoted in here saying i was told epstein belonged to intelligence and to leave it alone. second document is entitled, what epstein's bodyguard warned about his c.i.a. connections. mr. massie: the third document

is from fox. digital. it's titled epstein's private calendar reveals planned meetings with obama admin official, c.i.a. chief, and the last document is "wall street journal" article highlights 36 meetings with jeffrey epstein. he was the former prime minister of israel and head of military intelligence. for israel. he may have held that title. mr. jordan: without objection, the gentleman will hold for a second. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. raskin: thank you, mr. chairman. one request. this is the decision from august in u.s. v. epstein stating the government's 100,000 pages of epstein files dwarfs the 70-odd pages of epstein grand jury materials. mr. jordan: without objection. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. director patel, i watched some of your senate hearing yesterday when senator kennedy asked you, you've seen most of the files,

who if anyone did epstein traffic these women to beside himself? mr. massie: you replied, according to the transcript, there is no credible information that he trafficked them to anyone else. you also said somewhere in the hearing and here today that the problem is that the case files are constrained by limited search warrants from 2006 to 2007 and that the nonprosecution agreement ham strung future investigations. those constraints only apply to southern district of florida. they do not apply to southern district of new york, the location of the 2019 sex trafficking indictment. which produced many things, including a series of fd-302 documents. according to victims who corporated with the -- cooperated with the f.b.i. in that investigation, these documents in f.b.i. possession, your possession, detail at least 20 men, including mr. dailyy, c.e.o. of barkleys bank, who jeffrey epstein trafficked victims to. victims including minors, such

as virginia roberts giuffre, may very rest in peace. that list includes 19 over individuals, one hollywood producer worth a few hundred million dollars. one very prominent banker, one high profile government official, one high profile former politician, one owner of a car company in italy, one rock star, one magician, at least six billionaires including a billionaire from canada. we know these people exist in the f.b.i. files. the files that you control. i don't know exactly who they are. but the f.b.i. does. you have launched any investigations into any of these people and you have seen these 302 documents? dir. patel: sir, i have asked my f.b.i. agents to review the entirety of the epstein files and bring forth any credible information and we're working with congress not only do

divulge that information but any investigations that arise from any credible investigation will be brought. there have been no new materials brought to me launching a new indictment. mr. massie: so is the loophole here or is it your assertion that these victims aren't credible? that the 302's maybe didn't produce credible statements, that rise to a probable cause? dir. patel: it's not my assertion, sir. it's the assertion of two different united states attorneys' offices from three separate administrations who investigated those same materials. pleas massachusetts the 302 documents -- mr. massie: 3092 documents in the f.b.i. agencies possession? dir. patel: they reviewed that, yes, sir. mr. massie: you have reviewed those documents where the victims named the people who victimized them? dir. patel: personally, no, but the f.b.i. has. mr. massie: how can you sit here in front of the snrat and say there are no names? dir. patel: i said we are not in

the practice of releasing victims' names. that is not what we do. we are also not in the habit of releasing incredible information. that's not what we do. but multiple authorities have looked at the entirety of what we have. mr. massie: ok. i got to move on here. were you present when the a.g. had the white house event when she released the binders to social media influenceers? dir. patel: yes. mr. massie: so if you were willing to meet with social media influencers who stood to benefit from the sing asal -- sensational and sad stories of these victims, will you meet with the victims as well? dir. patel: the f.b.i. will meet with anyone who has new information? mr. massie: will you personally meet with them? dir. patel: the f.b.i. and the people handling the cases will. i don't know what day that was so no. mr. massie: they were released that day and there were victims' names who weren't redacted

because they were in such a rush and the victims are not happy about that. you have investigated any of the c.i.a. connections, you have seen the c.i.a. file on jeffrey epstein and if you wanted to see it, would they show it to you? dir. patel: i can speak for the f.b.i. that's presuming there's a c.i.a. case file and i've reviewed everything that the interagency that was provided to us. mr. massie: would you be willing to look at the c.i.a. file on him? dir. patel: if there is such a file and it hasn't been turned over to the f.b.i., the f.b.i. will look at any new investigative leads. mr. massie: you have made any progress on the pipe bomb investigation, january 6, and you have made any progress on the motive of the las vegas shooter? dir. patel: as to the first, it's an ongoing investigation. we have made progress. as to the second, i'll have to get back to you. mr. massie: thank you. i yield back. mr. jordan: unanimous consent request from the gentleman from

new york. an unsigned memorandum from july 7, 2025, that says we did not encover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties with the insignia of the department of justice and the f.b.i. mr. jordan: without objection. mr. johnson: plairm, i have an unanimous consent request. it's an article entitled d.o.j. deletes study showing domestic terrorists are most often right-wing. mr. jordan: without objection. mr. johnson: thank you. mr. jordan: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for five minutes. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. chairman. director patel, thank you for being here today. i want to first talk about the significant role that the f.b.i. plays in combating the national security threats posed by our nation's greatest threat, our nation's greatest security

threat, china and the chinese communist party. it's a fact that china is america's most significant national security threat, isn't that correct? dir. patel: i would say so, sir. mr. johnson: and you would agree with me that china wants to dominate the united states of america? dir. patel: i think that's largely their plan. johnson they want to dom -- mr. johnson: they want to dominate the world both militarily and economically, isn't that correct? dir. patel: i think so. mr. johnson: and, sir, you've been f.b.i. director for the last, what, eight months? dir. patel: seven months, yes. johnson during that time, you have healed -- mr. johnson: during that time, you have held any stock in any companies founded in china? dir. patel: i don't believe so. mr. johnson: well, you do own stock in a company knowned as elite depot. don't you? dir. patel: which one, sorry? mr. johnson: elite depot.

you own stock. dir. patel: i think that's -- i'll have to get back to you. i think it's a law firm and it's a company out of singapore. mr. johnson: no other company out of singapore which is owned by elite depot is the shein company which was founded in china. correct? dir. patel: that company operates out of taiwan. mr. johnson: they changed their head quarters from china back in 2022 to singapore for tax purposes. but it's owned by a chinese billionaire i think his name is charlie tzu and you own stock in the company that owns shrvetion he -- shein. dir. patel: which i disclosed during my confirmation process. mr. johnson: you certainly did. do you still hold that stock? that chinese company? dir. patel: pursuant to the department of justice who reviewed my material that was sub meted during my -- submitted

during my confirmation process, i was able to hold certain stocks. mr. johnson: you still hold the stocks that you have -- still hold on to these chinese stocks? these stocks in this chinese company? dir. patel: i disagree that it's a chinese company but i was -- the d.o.j., when you're appointed, makes a call on what you can and can't possess. mr. johnson: let me ask you this. chinese companies steal trademarks, they produce counterfeit products and sell them over the internet on platforms such as shein. they steal intellectual property and data from american companies. it seems inconsistent that would you own stock in a company that is based in a country that is the nation's premier national security threat, it's like you are putting your own financial

security over the security of the nation. dir. patel: i disagree with that characterization. mr. johnson: i think the american people look at it like it's a classic situation of the fox guarding the hen house. if the f.b.i. is charged with investigating espionage, economic espionage, by companies controlled by the chinese communist party and you are the director of the f.b.i., you've got a conflict of interest. dir. patel: sir, i would just show if there's any intimation that -- mr. johnson: why are you holding on to this stock? dir. patel: it wasn't a decision i made. mr. johnson: and it's valued at up to $5 million as of when you last reported. correct? $5 million in stock? dir. patel: no, i don't follow it. mr. johnson: but you're still making money off of it. dir. patel: i don't have any money off of anything.

mr. johnson: trump's trade policies directly impact the value of that chinese stock. won't you agree with that? dir. patel: which trade policy -- i'm not a trade expert. mr. johnson: ok, all right. dir. patel: i want to tell you this. mr. johnson: you're crazy on me today. let me ask you this question. why are you hiding pedophiles? why are you shielding pedophiles? why are you protecting pedophiles? dir. patel: that is maybe the most offensive thing you could say to me given the numbers of pedophiles -- mr. johnson: published in the 18,000 -- mr. jordan: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman yields back. mr. johnson: answer the question. mr. jordan: of course, the the gentleman can answer the question. dir. patel: since i took over the f.b.i. there's been a 33% increase -- mr. johnson: all of that started under christopher wray. dir. patel: no, it didn't. mr. johnson: all of that started

-- [talking simultaneously] europeing in here trying to take credit for something that a previous director instituted and largely brought to conclusion. dir. patel: i take no credit -- mr. jordan: it's clear that the director -- mr. johnson: it's incorrect also. mr. jordan: numbers are so much better than the previous director. dir. patel: i take no credit. the men and women of the f.b.i. have seen a 33 increase in the number of counterintelligence arrests. mr. johnson: all of a sudden when you come in here seven months ago -- mr. jordan: the gentleman's time has expired. dir. patel: and on the pedophile accusation, we have arrested 1500 child predators in the last seven months. mr. johnson: under investigations initiated by the prior directorship. mr. jordan: we really appreciate that the time of the gentleman's headaches pired. we now go -- of the gentleman has expired. we now go to the the gentleman from texas. mr. roy: the chang the chairman and the director for coming before the committee. i believe you probably agree with me that there's a significant organized effort on

the left side of the political spectrum to advance criminal organizations being able to put more criminals out on the streets. that what we've seen, we've seen this in daily action. are you familiar with the report that came out this last monday from the law enforcement legal defense fund? dir. patel: i'm not familiar with that. mr. roy: this report came out this past monday and it said that significant amount of the money flowing out of george soros and other leftist organizations and funders has been funding d.a.'s and prosecutors and, quote, many of these d.a.'s never managed an office, prosecutor or criminal case developed policies in dozens of america's largest cities and county, this report finds these district attorneys have outsourced parts of the american criminal justice system to activists and political donors. taking direction and advice on everything from staffing decisions and communications strategy. organizations, a complex web of donors going in through these organizations to radical -- i

put radical d.a.'s and prosecutors out there, putting criminals on the streets. does the f.b.i. director agree that this exists and is a problem? dir. patel: i will accept the factual representation and if that exists, itas problem. mr. roy: the organization such as the fair and just prosecution, center for justice, partnership for safety and justice, the very institute of justice, the amount of dollars flowing from george soros through and to these organizations and to the various prosecutors that have resulted in an increased crime on our streets, including the brutal murder of the ukrainian refugee in charlotte, i bring that up because that is one component of the problem. in addition, we have an organized effort targeting our border. the n.g.o.'s, the nonprofits and the deep pockets. the united nations. charitable organizations and a long list of over 250 organizations that the center for immigration studies put out that lays out a complex web of

organizations that were moving people into our country, knowing that they're dangerous, knowing that they're criminal. associated with taxpayer dollars flowing through the united nations and donor dollars flowing through organizations, including religious ones, putting these dangerous individuals on the street. that resulted in fentanyl in our communities, that resulted in the death of joslin nungary of hundreds, thousand. 100,000 people dieing from these narcotics every year. all of this in an organized effort, a complete effort by the radical left to use taxpayer dollars and these dollars to put people on our streets. in addition, the extent to which we've seen now with the southern poverty law center and their hate map targeting, for example, the family research council. where we had a shooting right here in d.c. over a decade ago. putting charlie kirk, putting a

target on tpusa, antifa, other radical organizations that are very specifically organized in targeting conservatives and ordinary americans. how about the organized effort to infiltrate our schools and advance transgender agenda? and advance a radical agenda? perhaps one that we will see expose further in the individual that actually shot charlie kirk. here's my question. will you as the director and are you as the director pursuing all legal channels to follow the truth wherever it may lead on this organized effort, one, and, two, do you agree that congress should take all action necessary to expose this web of dollars that are flowing to undermine our way of life? another minute my time and then i'd like to hear from you on this topic broadly. dir. patel: i'll keep it short. investigatively speaking, we are doing the following. we are following the money.

we are following the money in every organization and every person that is violating the federal code and it doesn't matter what your background or ideology is, we're following the money, we're using legal process to fool that money, issuing subpoenas to follow that money, using grand juries to follow that money and when we have results to recommend for prosecution to the department of justice, we will do that. and we will continue to publicize documents through congress, yes, when we make these findings. mr. roy: mr. chairman, i'd like unanimous consent to enter into the record outsourcing justice by law enforcement legal defense fund and a 2024 center for immigration studies on the united nations and other affiliated groups that are responsible for moving individuals into our country in a coordinated effort. i would like a unanimous consent to insert a letter that i sent that currently has 33 members of the united states house of representatives that have signed on and are calling for a special select committee to pursue the organized effort from the radical left to target our way of life and undermine our security by putting criminals on

the street and having our borders being wide open and putting us in danger. mr. jordan: without objection. mr. roy: and with that i would yield back. jordan without objection. the gentleman yields -- mr. jordan: without objection. the gentleman yields back. mr. johnson: mr. chairman, i have a couple of unanimous consent requests. one is a letter from senator tom cotton dated last year urging the u.s. to, quote, ensure that data from u.s. companies is not harvested by the chinese communist party through the purchase of shein software and technology. mr. jordan: without objection. mr. johnson: and also a statement by marco rubio, then-senator marco rubio which warned our u.k. allies about, quote, shein's deep ties to the people's republic of china. mr. jordan: without objection. mr. johnson: also, a crime --

the record crime is down in 2025, trump doesn't deserve credit, which demonstrates that the crime rates have been decreasing since 2023, which was published by the vera institute. mr. jordan: without objection. mr. johnson: also unanimous consent request to enter into the record an npr report from july of 2024, g.o.p. vows to make america safe again. statistics contradict their growing crime claims. mr. jordan: without objection. mr. johnson: also a report out of the american presidency project dated january 17, 2025, record low crime during the biden-harris administration. mr. jordan: without objection. mr. johnson: also, joe biden is correct that violent crime is near a 50-year low which was a

politifact publication of may, 2024. and last but not least, f.b.i. releases 2024 reported crimes in the nation, statistics, these are f.b.i. statistics, published on august 5, 2025, which tells decreases in murder rate, aggravated assault and robbery in 2024. mr. jordan: without objection. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized for unanimous consent. >> i ask unanimous consent to submit two sets of documents. mr. massie: the first is a series of emails from the victims of jeffrey epstein. they are making foia requests to get their own f.b.i. files and not having any success. so i want to bring attention to that by submitting that to the record. the second document that i want to submit to the record for the record, i know we don't usually read these.

this one's not readable. it's completely redacted. for the most part, the first 50 pages. this is actually the search warrant that was served on james o'keefe for a diary that he had already given to the government two months before and as it turns out, there were no indictments here. yet he still doesn't know why he was raided and i think he deserves to know. mr. jordan: without objection. mr. massie: thank you. mr. jordan: the chair now recognizes the gentleman from california. >> director, the first time you saw donald trump's name was in the epstein files, did you close the files or keep reading them? dir. patel: i have reviewed not the entirety of the files. so -- mr. swalwell: you haven't reviewed all of the epstein files? dir. patel: personally, no. mr. swalwell: you're the director of the f.b.i. this is the largest sex trafficking the case the f.b.i. has ever been a part of. your testimony today is you have not reviewed all the files? dir. patel: what i've been doing

is providing the safest country this country has seen in his supportic speed because the men and women of the f.b.i. are given the resources to reduce the homicide rate and drug trafficking rates and reduce the amount of children that are being trafficked -- mr. swalwell: it sounds like those children being trafficked appreciate the director reviewing the files. you say you don't know the number of times trump's name appears in the files so it could at least be 1,000 times, is that right? dir. patel: the number is not a leading factor. we have not released anyone's name in the epstein files that has not been credible. we have released every piece of legally permissible information. you can characterize the numbers however you want it. mr. swalwell: reclaiming my time, director. it soundses like if you don't know the number, it could at least be 1,000 times. dir. patel: it's not. it's not. mr. swalwell: is it at least 100 times? dir. patel: no. mr. swalwell: then what's the number? dir. patel: i dmoint but it's not that. mr. swalwell: don't you think it might be your job to know the

number? dir. patel: my job is not to engage in political innuendo so you can go out to the sticks and get your 20-second hit in your fundraising article. the people of california are being underserved by your representation. mr. swalwell: if the president is not implicated, why not release everything? dir. patel: we've released everything that is credible and lawfully able to be released. your fixation on this matter and baseless accusations that i'm hiding pedophiles is disgusting. anyone that says that needs to look at the stats alone. and go back to the state of california who is receiving the biggest surge in f.b.i. resources through my redeployment because the cities of los angeles, san diego and san francisco need it. mr. swalwell: remembering your oath to tell the truth, did you ever tell donald trump his name is in the files? dir. patel: i have never spoken to president trump about the epstein files. mr. swalwell: did you ever tell the attorney general that donald trump's name is in the epstein files? dir. patel: we've had numerous discussions about the entirety

of the epstein files and the reviews conducted by our team. mr. swalwell: did you tell the attorney general that trump's name is in the epstein's files? it's a simple question. dir. patel: during many conversations that the attorney expwren and i have had on the matter of epstein, we have reviewed -- mr. swalwell: the question is simple. did you tell the attorney general that donald trump's name is in the epstein files? yes or no? dir. patel: use the alphabet. no? a, b, c. mr. swalwell: it sounds like you don't want to tell us. did you tell the attorney general that donald trump's names are not in the epstein files? dir. patel: why don't you serve your constituency by reducing violent crime in this country and the number of pedophiles that are legally harbored in your sanctuary cities in california. i'll work with you on that. do you want to work with us on that. mr. swalwell: did you tell the attorney general that donald trump's name is in the epstein files? dir. patel: the question has been asked and answered.

mr. swalwell: you've not answered it and we'll take your evasiveness as a consciousness of guilt. did donald trump ever say to you just find and release the entire truth, don't worry if i'm in it? dir. patel: the instructions from the administration were to release all credible information and we have done that. mr. swalwell: did donald trump ever provide information as jeffrey epstein as an informant? you've played this cute shell game where you say you can't release everything because the court has said that it legally is not allowed to be released. but the court calls bullshit. judge richard berman said when you went to the court, quote, information contained in the epstein grand jury transcripts pales, pales in comparison to epstein investigation information and materials in the hands of the department of justice. so let's move on, director. you wrote a book called "government gangsters." you identified 20 individuals in that book. you put me on that list at the

top of the list. thank you. my children find it flattering. 20 of those individuals have been investigated or have had adverse actions. director, considering that you have identified these people as, quote, government gangsters, will you recuse yourself from making any investigation decisions about these individuals? dir. patel: anyone that has been terminated at the f.b.i. has failed to meet the muster -- mr. swalwell: i will work on the audio occasional -- dir. patel: i'm going to call bullshit on your entire career in congress. it has been a disgrace to the american people. mr. swalwell: mr. chairman, would you recuse yourself -- mr. jordan: the gentleman has no time remaining. >> would you admonish the witness not to insult members? mr. raskin: quick point of order. can the gentleman be extended an additional 20 seconds to complete his thought since the witness decided to interrupt him? mr. jordan: then the witness will be able to respond if he wants. mr. raskin: thank you.

mr. swalwell: my question is, will you recuse yourself, yes or no, from investigating or making decisions about the 60 individuals, including myself, that you identified as government gangsters? yes or no? mr. jordan: the gentleman's time has expired. the witness may respond if he would like. dir. patel: the no. mr. swalwell: the answer was no as i heard. dir. patel: correct. mr. jordan: ok. the gentleman from wisconsin. the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, chairman. thank you, director patel, for being here today. >> i wanted to talk a little bit about the assassination of charlie kirk and the f.b.i.'s subsequent investigation. i know it's really sensitive and you can make the call as to whether or not obviously it's something that you can respond to. but i think it's still fresh on many people's mind, i want to congratulate you and utah law enforcement for the work you did in identifying the suspect and apprehending him. fits

mr. fitzgerald: according to public reports and i think this is what maybe -- i still have questions about, maybe the public does, according to public reports, the alleged shooter arrives on the utah valley university campus nearly four hours before the shooting. was that your understanding? dir. patel: i'll let the public reports reflect themselves. i don't have the exact timeline. mr. fitzgerald: so we don't have any idea his prep or how he set up or utilized that time when he first showed up on campus? dir. patel: all of those are being currently investigated through our cell phone analysis and through our witness interviews and the state of utah's now announced charges seeking the death penalty against the suspect so we're a little limited in what we can say. mr. fitzgerald: sure, i understand. the suspected, like you referred to, is then captured on security footage jumping off the roof of the alleged shooting location. do we have any idea how the suspect got up on the roof in the first place? i think for members of congress,

especially after butler, pennsylvania, it's just unimaginable that there could be some type of security breakdown prior to an event of that size where somebody could toole access a rooftop. dir. patel: not commenting on the case but having gone to the crime scene and walked the steps that we believe were taken, the roof was actually readily accessible through an exterior stair well so anyone could have gotten on it. mr. fitzgerald: ok. the suspect flees on foot to kind of this wooded area where he drops the rifle, wraps it in a towel and then proceeds to his staged vehicle and basically drives home. so, do we have any idea what the towel was about, was it used later to identify a place where the firearm was left or -- dir. patel: what we can tell you is the towel, there was a screw driver found on the rooftop which d.n.a. was collected off of. and the towel was found wrapped

around the firearm in question in a wooded area next to the campus. all have been processed for d.n.a. mr. fitzgerald: and then according to the suspect's roommate, there were allegedly messages on instant messaging platforms, specifically discord, suggesting the towel may have been used to identify that weapons location. so the public reports have suggested that the shooter acted alone. do we still believe that that's true? do we have any idea as to whether or not those discord messages led us to believe that the shooter may have had help in any way or assistance? dir. patel: i can only speak to the f.b.i.'s investigation and our investigation is ongoing and we are interviewing any of those individuals involved in that chat and other individuals in the area. mr. fitzgerald: very good. and if -- so my suggestion, if there are accomplices, i'm sure this is something the f.b.i. is going to continue to investigate

fully and thoroughly into the future. dir. patel: yes, sir. mr. fitzgerald: the reason i ask that is because i don't know that was necessarily the case with butler, pennsylvania. so thank you so much for your persistence. kind of in this matter. there's still a lot of public questions that need to be asked. let me shift to another topic very quickly. on july 31, 2025, the d.o.j. and the c.i.a. declassified the annex to special counsel john durham's 2023 report on operation crossfire hurricane. the 29-pages annex it contains things like the clinton man. >> you can watch the rest of this on our free c-span now video app as we take you live to the u.s. capitol as the house gavels in. be -- prayer will be be -- prayer